More reaction from readers on shooting, gun issues

In response to all the knee-jerk reactions and "expert" opinions about the NRA's suggestion to have an armed guard at every public school, the uniformed and anti-gun public should know that we here in Buncombe County have had this suggestion in place for quite some time. These blessings in disguise are SROs, or school resource officers, who are armed, qualified and professionally sworn law enforcement officers who keep our county and city schoolchildren safe from internal and external threats, and I would like to personally commend these officers for their service and to Sheriff Van Duncan for continuing this all-important practice.Robby Gouge, Weaverville# # #Your editorial on the Newtown tragedy was thoughtful, sensitive and fair. Your columnist John Boyle, on the other hand, must have been channeling the merchants of death at the NRA. Their prophylaxis for schoolhouse massacres? More guns. As if the cure for cancer was more cancer. At least Boyle didn't have the additional effrontery to demand, as did the NRA's Wayne LaPierre, that Congress cut foreign aid, rather than raise taxes, to pay for armed police at every American school. But they're both wrong. The presence of an armed officer didn't deter the Columbine killers, and in future such situations it would simply make him or her the first target. The path to protecting our schools - and theaters, malls and houses of worship - from deranged killers begins with inhibiting them from acquiring weapons of mass destruction. But we're told by the NRA and its followers that their right to play with semiautomatic weapons transcends the American public's right to be as safe as the people of most other civilized countries. This is selfishness and hedonism at their worst. A New York Times editorial described LaPierre's rant as "mendacious, delusional, almost deranged." I quibble with the modifier "almost."Martin Dyckman, Waynesville# # #With all the talk of arming schools, I wish to point out some unintended consequences. On page 62 of NRA's publication "Guide to Personal Protection in the Home," "Studies of shooting incidents involving law enforcement officers, which typically take place at close range, show that police officers achieve hits less than 20 percent of the time." That is with trained and qualified police - less than 20 percent ... cost? About $80,000 per year per officer. So much for police budget cuts. And those who think teachers should be armed? How will teachers fare better with their hit rate, given their inherent lack of experience, not to mention, who pays for their weapons, training, certifications and time to requalify every quarter. Cost? That school budget thing keeps showing up somehow. Worse, what if they miss the shooter and hit a student? Turning schools into armed camps may discourage invasions. But check out the YouTube video of the police officer shooting himself in the foot during a grade school firearms training session. Another "unintended consequence?" The people making these recommendations/decisions need to employ critical thinking skills before "pulling the trigger" on this one. I worry that these skills are in short supply.Dee Lawrence, Weaverville# # #Speaking from the depths of its broken heart, The National Rifle Association has proposed its solution to the problem of mass murder in our schools: Convert them to armed camps.And why is this necessary? It's because we can't interfere with the right of people to make a plaything of a weapon suitable only for massacre. Of course it's not always a plaything; sometimes it's there to help live out cynically disseminated adolescent fantasies such as those involving the repeated prediction of impending invasion by the nonexistent U.N. Army, or a Socialist takeover of government or seizure of one's guns by a hated president. Look no further than the surge in gun sales since the Newtown tragedy and consider its motivation and its impetus, then follow the money.I hope all those gun buyers had the extra funds for those gun purchases and that their families won't suffer as a result, because they needn't worry. The unholy trinity of gun and ammunition manufacturers, The National Rifle Association and the Republican Party, with their financial roots tightly intertwined, will protect them from anything resembling common sense.Tom Coulson, Marshall # # #I know nothing whatever about firearms, but I rather think that when the second amendment was written, the only guns available fired one bullet at a time. The purpose of arming civilians was to protect the security of a free state. Nobody foresaw that a free people would turn their weapons upon each other. Had the present - day weapons been available then, the second amendment would never have been written or even contemplated. Repeal it.Marion Kaminkow, Asheville

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

Email this article

More reaction from readers on shooting, gun issues

In response to all the knee-jerk reactions and 'expert' opinions about the NRA's suggestion to have an armed guard at every public school, the uniformed and anti-gun public should know that we here